Cited by 182Endometriosis Research and TreatmentEctopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and ManagementMenstrual Health and Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 129 of the 133 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 308 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Endometriosis and Medical Therapy: From Progestogens to Progesterone Resistance to GnRH Antagonists: A Review

Open access
Donnez, Jacques, Dolmans, Marie-Madeleine·2021·Journal of Clinical Medicine

Abstract

Background: The first objective of this review was to present, based on recent literature, the most frequently applied medical options (oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) and progestogens) for the management of symptomatic endometriosis, and evaluate their effectiveness in treating premenopausal women with endometriosis-associated pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, non-menstrual pelvic pain and dyspareunia. The second objective was to review the concept of progesterone resistance and newly available treatment options. Methods: We reviewed the most relevant papers (n = 73) on the efficacy of OCPs and progestogens as medical therapy for endometriosis, as well as those on progesterone resistance and new medical alternatives (oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist). Eleven papers, essentially reviews, were selected and scrutinized from among 94 papers discussing the concept of progesterone resistance. Results: Having reviewed the most significant papers, we can confirm that OCPs and progestogens are effective in two-thirds of women suffering from endometriosis, but that other options are required in case of failure (in one-third of women due to progesterone resistance) or intolerance to these compounds. It is clear that there is a need for effective long-term oral treatment capable of managing endometriosis symptoms, while mitigating the impact of side effects. Biochemical, histological and clinical evidence show that estrogens play a critical role in the pathogenesis of endometriosis, so lowering levels of circulating estrogens should be considered an effective medical approach. The efficacy of three oral GnRH antagonists is discussed on the basis of published studies. Conclusion: There is a place for GnRH antagonists in the management of symptomatic endometriosis and clinical trials should be conducted, taking into account the different phenotypes in order to propose novel algorithms.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This narrative review concludes that oral contraceptives and progestogens relieve endometriosis-associated pain in about two-thirds of women, while progesterone resistance explains many non-responders, and it evaluates oral GnRH antagonists as newer options. It advocates phenotype-adapted, symptom-oriented medical management and further trials.

Key findings

  • First-line OCPs/progestogens are effective in two-thirds of women with symptomatic endometriosis, but one-third are non-responders, often explained by progesterone resistance; deep nodular endometriosis may be especially resistant. Progesterone resistance is linked to PR-B loss, ERβ upregulation, deficient 17β-HSD2, impaired retinoic acid signaling, inflammation/oxidative stress, genetics/epigenetics, and mesenchymal progenitors.
  • Elagolix phase III trials: dysmenorrhea improvement at 3 months was 46.4% with 150 mg once daily and 75.8% with 200 mg twice daily versus 19.6% with placebo in Elaris EM-I; in Elaris EM-II, 43.4% and 72.4% versus 22.7%. Non-menstrual pelvic pain improvement was 50.4%/54.5% versus 36.5% in EM-I and 49.8%/57.8% versus 36.5% in EM-II. Hot flushes were dose-dependent, and BMD decreased.
  • Linzagolix phase II (n = 328): ≥30% reduction in overall pelvic pain at week 12 was 61.5%, 56.4%, and 56.3% for 75, 100, and 200 mg versus 34.5% for placebo; at week 24, rates were 70.8%, 66.7%, and 77.3%. Amenorrhea at week 12 was 36.3%, 55.8%, and 80.9% versus 4.3%; 200 mg suppressed E2 to 11 pg/mL, and lumbar spine BMD changes were −0.80%, −1.37%, and −2.60%.
  • Relugolix phase III SPIRIT-1 (n = 635) and SPIRIT-2 (n = 616): at week 24, dysmenorrhea/non-menstrual pelvic pain responder rates with relugolix combination therapy were 75.5%/58.5% and 75.2%/66%; BMD changes were −0.70%/−1.99% and −0.78%/−1.92%; hot flushes were 10.4%/33.6% and 13.6%/35%. The authors conclude GnRH antagonists have a place in management, but phenotype-specific trials and cost-effectiveness considerations remain.

Methods

  • Narrative review with a PubMed/Embase search up to December 2020 using keywords including endometriosis, progesterone, progestogen, GnRH agonist, GnRH antagonist, medical therapy, and add-back therapy.
  • From 2010 to 2020, 4732 manuscripts were identified; after screening, 73 articles on OCPs/progestogens were selected, 94 papers on progesterone resistance were considered with 11 selected, and 20 original papers on oral GnRH antagonists were reviewed.
  • Synthesis is descriptive rather than a formal systematic review or meta-analysis, incorporating phase II/III trial data and conference presentations.

Limitations

  • No formal limitations section is provided. The authors state that further investigations are needed, including real-world populations, add-back therapy, comparisons with OCPs and progestins, and phenotype-specific trials; they also note that RCTs for SPRMs are lacking and that OCP evidence is limited and of low quality.
  • Evident from the text: article selection was subjective (“methodologically adequate, very well written, updated, informative and well balanced”), with no reported systematic quality assessment or risk-of-bias appraisal.
  • Evident from the text: some long-term GnRH antagonist data, including 52-week linzagolix and relugolix phase III results, are cited from conference presentations/abstracts rather than full peer-reviewed reports, and no meta-analysis is performed.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/jcm10051085

Cites

129 of 129 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Figure 1 GnRH antagonist mechanism of action.
Figure 1 GnRH antagonist mechanism of action.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Expected estradiol (E2) levels during the menstrual cycle, under GnRH agonist and under GnRH antagonist therapy without and with add-back therapy (ABT).
Figure 2 Expected estradiol (E2) levels during the menstrual cycle, under GnRH agonist and under GnRH antagonist therapy without and with add-back therapy (ABT).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Mean percentage of bone mineral density (BMD) loss at week 24 (lumbar spine) in the different groups of women treated by different doses of GnRH antagonist (elagolix 150 mg once daily; elagolix 200 mg twice daily; linzagolix 75 mg, 100 mg and 200 mg once daily; and relugolix 40 mg combination therapy (CT): relugolix plus add-back therapy, once daily).
Figure 3 Mean percentage of bone mineral density (BMD) loss at week 24 (lumbar spine) in the different groups of women treated by different doses of GnRH antagonist (elagolix 150 mg once daily; elagolix 200 mg twice daily; linzagolix 75 mg, 100 mg and 200 mg once daily; and relugolix 40 mg combination therapy (CT): relugolix plus add-back therapy, once daily).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Mean percentage of BMD loss at week 52 (lumbar spine) in the different group of women treated by different doses of GnRH antagonist (elagolix and linzagolix). Patients randomized to linzagolix 200 mg were switched to linzagolix 100 mg at week 24.
Figure 4 Mean percentage of BMD loss at week 52 (lumbar spine) in the different group of women treated by different doses of GnRH antagonist (elagolix and linzagolix). Patients randomized to linzagolix 200 mg were switched to linzagolix 100 mg at week 24.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 E2 level up to week 24 in women under placebo, linzagolix (LGX) 75 mg, 100 mg and 200 mg. Patients under placebo were switched to linzagolix 100 mg at week 12.
Figure 5 E2 level up to week 24 in women under placebo, linzagolix (LGX) 75 mg, 100 mg and 200 mg. Patients under placebo were switched to linzagolix 100 mg at week 12.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Mean change from baseline in the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pelvic pain for 28 days before the end of treatment period (adapted from Osuga et al. [104]).
Figure 6 Mean change from baseline in the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pelvic pain for 28 days before the end of treatment period (adapted from Osuga et al. [104]).CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

159 Not checked yet · 6 Own interpretation · 5 No basis given · 2 Partly supported · 1 Supported · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 304 references — free account

Show all 94 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 75
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 13
79 of 79
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Retrograde menstruation according to Sampson's theory is a valid mechanism of endometriosis.

    “Based on the role of retrograde menstruation according to Sampson’s theory, blocking ovulation and menstruation by means of hormonal therapies may in theory be disease-modulating and control the symptoms of endometriosis.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Surgery cannot cure endometriosis.

    “surgery is of course able to eliminate visible endometriotic lesions, but cannot cure the disease.”
2 of 2

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 182

Metadata

Authors
Donnez, J., & Dolmans, M.-M.
Affiliations
  • UCLouvain (BE)
  • Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc (BE)
Corresponding author
Donnez, Jacques
Venue
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-03-05
Volume
10
Issue
5
Pages
1085
ISSN
2077-0383 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3133947928
Cited by
182
References
133
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 19
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Fonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS (5/4/150/5, grant 5/4/150/5)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Menstrual Health and Disorders
Keywords
endometriosis, medical therapy, progestogens, oral contraceptives, progesterone resistance, GnRH antagonist, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, non-menstrual pelvic pain, estrogen, premenopausal women, treatment efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review